siasm, and Roosevelt supporters in
Boston are almost as scarce as
hen's teeth. Taft has behaved with
dignity and amiable forbear-
ance since the announcement. But the test is coming when the
Republicans have to face the question whether Taft can win against
the Democratic candidate. For the Democrats will not vote for
Taft needless to say. In last week’s
primaries in
North Dakota,
Lafolette won over
Roosevelt, but
Taft was nowhere.
Taft seems to-
day pretty sure to get the nomination; but if he is defeated in
November, the interesting consideration will be as to the effect
of Roosevelt’s present stand. (By the
way, he told me he would
support Taft, if nominated, as one
who preferred 20 to 19). Near-
ly every one today claims he is dead for ever as a political factor.
If, on the other hand, he is correct in his premise that we are on
the verge of an economic revolution,- and there are signs of this in
spite of the present visible improvement in business – will he not
become the logical leader of a new progressive (Republican) party?
His lack of loyalty to Taft is
partly a matter of taste, which the
people may forget or ignore if they feel that in spite of his
foibles he is the man to handle the future situation. It is even
now not entirely evident what the mass are thinking. All our
friends of course with scarcely an exception are intemperately
abusive. But I hear rumors today that the people are in his favor
in
Maine,- which if true would be important.
It has been rather awkward for me,- for I can not exactly ap-
ply to myself Milton’s lines "Among
the faithless, faithful only
he," - for, as you have perceived, I think he has made an
un-
necessary mistake which promises to be his
Waterloo. And yet at